Name for the international collaboration

[Droit au Corps Association]

Simon said:

This movement is about forced circumcision of boys, not opposing voluntary circumcision of men. I would like to use the child's perspective and using the assumption that children don't want to be circumcised, if they had a say they would say no. My motivation for intactivism is to speak on behalf of the children, boys in this case.
So I thought of "A Voice For Boys" Second line: Ending forced genital cutting of minors, or ending forced genital cutting. I know it's not inclusive but there are so many FGM groups already. They all use 'women', 'girls' in their names. If you make it gender neutral like Genital Autonomy it is too abstract for most people I'm afraid.

https://www.endfgm.eu/members/

I certainly like to include intersex too, but I am in favour of a name that people understand or can relate too. In the goals there can be mention of the right to genital integrity applies to all children, boys, girls and intersex

https://16days.thepixelproject.net/16-organisations-charities-and-grassroots-groups-working-to-stop-fgm/

A better tagline could be a positive one "defending his right to an intact body"

[guys...@gmail.com]

Intact has some connotation to the sanctuarization of the body and refers to a state, that can be unwanted by somebody wanting to change his body with full consent.
If we want to be integrative to all forms of abuses, we need a term including all forms of abuse, even those that doen't alter the body, in order to also include psychological abuse.
I would prefer something that refers to the real problem : the lack of free and informed consent, free selfdetermination. The fact of beeing against the influence of others on my own body.
Think of some women who cannot change their genitals at all. I remember it's the case in Denmark (?).

[Droit au Corps Association]

Since the International Coalition for Genital Integrity is defunct, it seems appropriate to replace the word "coordination" by "coalition" in order to give more body and importance to the ICASM, which would be the acronym of International Coalition for the Abandonment of Sexual Mutilation.

[mabf...@gmail.com]

As regard the suggested names or titles I’m suggesting: “International Coalition to stop Male Circumcision” ICSMC”

I think we have to concentrate in combating male circumcision only, as there are many organisations already devoted for FGM, also the issue of genital mutilation or assignment for cases of DSD is interesting for a minority of populations, if compared to male circumcision, and the dialogue of discussion and argument should be directed to the physicians mainly dealing with such cases.

[michael...@gmail.com]

I think the current name is perfect: ICASM. Sexual Mutilation is clear and unequivocal. It's straight to the point. And it covers all bases. 

And we should not pander to the FGM groups bigotry for a second - we are against the circumcision of any child! We don't need to make excuses or redefine our quest to protect all children, simply because of FGM groups confusion, bigotry and shadow. To be just about male circumcision would be to be just as myopic and unethical as FGM groups are. On the contrary, we must show leadership. ALL child sexual mutilation needs to end, and then once thats achieved, all adult sexual mutilation. However one fixes the other - once we end circumcision of boys, it will essentially end circumcision for girls and adults. Boy Child Circumcision is the thread that props up all other circumcision, and once unraveled, all other forms of circumcision will collapse. 

Regards,
Michael Winnel
Foreskin Revolution

[Simon ten Kate]

Coalition is much better, I agree. International Coalition for the Abandonment of Sexual Mutilation.

[ICASM Network]

Brian D. Earp wrote:

I understand the impulse to talk of mutilation, but I think the term can be counterproductive in certain ways and I tend to refer to 'cutting' in my writing for the reasons explained here 

http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2019/12/mutilation-or-enhancement-what-is-morally-at-stake-in-body-alterations/

Also ICASM is already the acronym of International Academy of Aviation and Space Medicine

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

International Academy of Aviation and Space Medicine https://www.iaasm.org/ (IAASM and not ICASM)

International Congress of Aviation and Space Medicine (ICASM): it's a event from IAASM but not a legal entity, then not much trouble for our ICASM I suppose

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

Excellent suggestion to use 'cutting', then the name of the coalition will be International Coalition for the Abandonment of Cutting (ICAC)

Question: is Breast_ironing included in 'cutting'? I suppose this practice is included in 'sexual mutilation' (but not 'genital mutilation') and that it is a concern for our coalition?

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

maybe we should consider having two headings:

- 1 extremely precise internal title that tells the truth about exactly what we all want > ‘International Coalition for the Abandonment of Sexual Mutilation’.

- 1 brand for the most effective external communication to achieve our objectives, perhaps less accurate and more ‘Com’, using ‘cutting’ for example: ‘Compassion and Cutting (CAC)’, ‘Toward a public debate on cutting (PDC)’, ‘Cutting and the future of humanity (CFH)’...

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

Or more ambitious in the mission ‘International Coalition for the Abandonment of Non-Consensual Bodily Alterations and Medically Unnecessary’ or completely accurate ‘International Coalition for the Abandonment of Bodily Alterations at risk of suffering, without consent and medically unmotivated’, enlarged over sexual organs alterations. The words ‘at risk of suffering’ are needed to avoid the case of education (alteration of the brain without consent and medically unmotivated). The ‘medically unmotivated’ makes more room for vaccination than ‘medically unnecessary’.

[Simon ten Kate]

"What makes medically unnecessary genital cutting morally wrong is its being done non-consensually. It does not matter if it is mutilating or not – that is up to the person who is affected to decide – what matters is that it should be that person’s own choice, when they are competent to make such a decision."

I think we should include the non-consensuality aspect in the name.  International Coalition for the Abandonment of Forced Genital Cutting.

[michael...@gmail.com]

Marieke, I love the teal/turquoise colour scheme. And I like the globe symbolizing the world. I am not sure, if I like or not, the hands - I understand the symbolism - but I wonder if there is a different symbol we could use? I will think about it. 

      Thank you for your effort to put this logo together, I think it is a great start. Did you know, in developmental psychology and human development theory, that Teal/Turquoise symbolize later stage (higher stage) human development! ICASM are most definitely a later/higher stage development, organisation. See Frederic Laloux's book "Reinventing Organizations" https://www.reinventingorganizations.com/. Thus, your colour scheme is excellent :) 

Regards, Michael
Foreskin Revolution

[dallieresophie]

Hello

I agree with Michael.
Mohamed, for years now I have been talking about intersex, and they have told me: "but circumcision is nothing!".

I managed to convince them of a similar origin and common points: children who are not asked for consent. Physical, psychological and sexual consequences can exist in both cases .

Today, the French leader, Vincent Guillot, who has received quite a lot of media coverage, including abroad, advocates the union of all those who are campaigning for the abandonment of child mutilation.

Reading it was extraordinary for me.

I approached Dr. Mukwege (nicknamed: the man who repairs women) before his Nobel Prize and also Dr. Foldes (the Frenchman who invented the operation to repair excised women who is a urologist). Both of them encouraged me but are unable to say it officially. They fear for their lives. Denis Mukwege has been under the protection of the blue helmets for years.

So this year I started to approach the basis of the FGM: the excised women themselves.
It's going to be long for France because we're starting from very, very far away. We have to deconstruct to make them understand that if, wherever we excise, we also circumcise, it is because there is a link and that only the joint fight will lead to progress against FGM, which they themselves speak of as a relative failure given the no-regression in countries where it is the norm for the majority of women. So much time and money for so little, some of them wonder: but what are we doing wrong? What needs to be changed?

This is where Sophie comes in with her speech. I'm not successful yet but I know it's only a matter of time.

ICASM is currently focusing on the small group of "friends" who know each other and who are campaigning for the abolition of mutilation ("for the abolition of mutilation" is better than "against mutilation") and mainly against GMMs. Then we will widen the circle (it won't be so easy) to other GMM movements and then the intersex people will be invited and normally they will accept without too much difficulty. Ideally the FGM will ask to join us...(I like to dream, it sometimes feels good in the middle of this suffering).

You must know that already 2 German FGM associations are in phase with the common fight of the 2 mutilations.
This is the excellent work of Victor Schiering.

Do you understand that at DaC we have a very very broad vision and a strategy that has been thought out for many years.

I hope that you adhere to this very ambitious strategy because to gain visibility, we must all unite.

Sophie

[dallieresophie]

J'aime beaucoup l'article de Brian qui me convaincs en partie sur "mutilation".

Cependant "couper" ne me satisfait pas totalement.

Je l'utilise lorsque je veux provoquer mon interlocuteur.

J'ai dernièrement rencontré le Dr Pierre Foldès qui est l'urologue qui a inventé la technique de réparation des femmes excisées.

Il a expliqué une chose totalement non intuitive.

Certaines tribus ne coupent pas (ou plus) le clitoris mais vont le piquer avec une aiguille. Ainsi physiquement on ne voit rien. Ces femmes se plaignant quand même et racontait une scène aussi horrible que les autres femmes "coupées", il a "ouvert" pour voir pourquoi ces plaintes. Les dégâts internes étaient bien pires voire difficilement réparables.

Cela me fait également penser qu'un jour d'autres entités pourraient vouloir rejoindre la coalition comme par ex des personnes qui militeraient contre : le repassage des seins (Cameroun), les scarifications voire ces hommes qu'on appellent des "hyènes" dont le métier est de violer des filles jugées pas "sages" (Malawi)...

Je ne sais pas ce qu'il en est dans vos pays mais en France, la "non violence éducative" (NVEO) commence à faire pas mal de bruit et ne devrait plus s'arrêter tout autour de la planète. Ces VEO sont largement présentes dans de nombreux pays où l'on pratique les mutilations sexuelles.

La proposition de JC de rajouter le mot "non-consentant" me semble important.

"Altération" a du sens et pour l'instant c'est la meilleure proposition mais peut-être y ajouter un mot encore plus généraliste de tout ce qui peut être traumatisant, humiliant et avoir des impacts sur le cerveau des enfants comme les neurosciences sont en train de le démontrer. Souffrance ?

'‘International Coalition for the Abandonment of Non-Consensual Bodily Alterations"

[Guy Sinden]

It would be interesting to think of other fields that have quite some interfaces with our topic. While we start from male circumcision of juveniles in the narrow sense and have already extended it to sexual modification in a broader sense, there are some issues whose existence is based on the absence of effective consent and also concern adults.

We at Droitaucorps have found that a ban on circumcision in general, and male circumcision in particular, is not far-reaching enough. Neither is there only circumcision, nor is it possible to reach the desired goal by omitting stages.

At the periphery of our topic, I find further topics, which we could also cover, if not directly in terms of content, to be so broadly defined that these topics can be covered at any time:

- The Marriage of Minors

- Rape

- Psychological abuse

- Religious indoctrination

- Prostitution, etc.

Common to all these issues is the absence of informed and free consent of the concerned person.

Instead of a ban, we have therefore decided to focus on that effective consent and to be the source of the information necessary for such consent.

Often a ban is seen as a method to achieve a goal.

We believe that a ban is not a means, but at best an end.

If a boy or a man were to be circumcised, he could do so if he gave his free and informed consent. If circumcision were prohibited, an adult man could not be circumcised for supposedly aesthetic or religious reasons. A woman would be denied a labia correction desired for psychological reasons, as is apparently the case in some countries.

It is therefore much more interesting and purposeful to work out a catalogue of conditions that are sufficient to be able to consider consent as free and informed. Age is always the same as a condition, as well as other criteria that should be defined at the end of a debate

Therefore my wish is to make the acronym of the name broader and more positive.

Perhaps like this:

FFIC: For free and informed consent

icFic: International coalition for free and informed consent.

I think it is important to address these issues in order to become aware of our location, to know where we want to locate the limits of our activities. This is what we then call our horizon.

[dallieresophie]

Si j'écris en français, la traduction est-elle correcte pour vous ou me conseillez vous d'utiliser DeepL ?

Les propositions de Guy, JC et moi vont dans le même sens. Dans ce cas il faut revoir les statuts ?

[Marieke Silvere]

Dear all, 

I am sorry, I repost my previous message below and the logo proposal since I had make a mistake with my email address (and everything was messed up between my mailboxes). Moreover, I would like to thank Michael and Guy for their fast feed-back and answer to them : 

- @Michael : indeed, my first idea was to look for a drawing of the "world" to symbolize the international feature of our organization but I haven't found a satisfactory symbol of the globe in the website database. Thus, I looked for the keyword "alliance" and I found the hands that I liked as well (since it shows the mutual aid inside ICASM). Nevertheless, I can look again in the database for different images (or I can give you access to my account for this project so that you can have a look also). Unfortunately, it appears that we cannot upload an external images to this online software (I think they fear copyright issues) but if you find the "perfect" image, juste send it to me and I will try indeed to reproduce the logo on a other software (or I'll ask a member of Droit au Corps who is very good with this sort of things and helped us already with our Brit Shalom cards very fast). 

- @Guy: indeed you are right, the colors won't look nice on a black and white printout, nevertheless, on the internet I think that colors would make the logo easier to identify by the public. What we can do when the "color" logo is approved by all, is to make a black and white version to be used when needed (companies do that as well). 

-@all : I also like the name "‘International Coalition for the Abandonment of Non-Consensual Bodily Alterations", but I am not sure if  it should be "bodily" or simply "body'" (which seems more natural to me). Can we have the opinion of  a native English speaker on this point please ? Then, in any case, in short it would be "ICANCBA", thus more difficult to pronounce than "ICASM" which is a pity. Thus, I would rather stay with ICASM finally (because even though it won't be the public name of the organization, we will use it a lot and it needs to be easy to pronounce). And personnaly, I think that in "mutilation", there is already the idea (for most people at least) that it is non-consensual. If some people voluntarily choose circumcision (after giving their informed consent indeed) then for them it is not "mutilation" (but an "improvement"), thus it dosen't enter in the range of ICASM activities and they should not be annoyed by the name of our organization (such as an esthetic breast operation is not a "mutilation" if the person freely gives consent to it I think). This could be a way to defend the name of our organization in front of opponents (if we choose ICASM indeed). Moreover, I personnaly think that it will be easier to convince organizations against excision or intersex mutilations to join our coalition if we use "mutilation" rather than "alteration" which they could see as a minimization of their sufferings. 

Kind regards,

Marieke

 

_______________

Dear all, 

while we were discussing the option to indicate in our national open letters that our organization is part of ICASM, I thought we would thus need to have a logo. Please find attached a first quick proposal that I have made for free on https://www.designevo.com/. This is a low resolution logo but to be able to download a high resolution one and use it for free, we would need to pay 50 dollars ot the website (only once). There is also the option to request the creation of the logo and the complete identity of the organization from 99designs (as suggested by Tyler) but it costs 549 euros (at least) from what I understood on their website. 

Please let me know what you think of this proposal, do not hesitate to be direct (I won't mind at all since I did this very fast :)). Or don't hesitate to make precise suggestions for improvement that I could try to implement on the website and share again (like "I don't like the colors, or the font, or the drawing" and I would rather prefer ...). Maybe we could try to do something nice together before asking for professional aid. 

Thanks in advance. 

Kind regards,

Marieke

[Marieke Silvere]

Hi again, 

here is another version of the logo, I was just playing with the software and thinking about the fact that someone mentioned we should put "children" in the name of the organization and also the idea we had at Droit au Corps a few years ago to change the logo in order to better represent male, female and intersex mutilations (I hade spent some time on that without finding a convincing solution at the time). Thus, I looked for "children" in the database and found this five kids (in black) which I pasted under the drawing of the globe with the hands (which can mean both mutual aid and protection I think) and then I changed the color of the kids using the colorscale that Michael liked on the first one (this it to give the idea that the children are very diverse, and not only male and female as on the original drawing, and thus cover all sexual mutilations : note that the intersex "color code" seems to be "purple" in France at least). I adjusted the color scale quickly, but if you think it shall be more "blue to pink" or on the contrary refere less to "genre" stereotype and use more variations of "purple" it can be done as well. Finally, since it is less colorful than the first one, it seems to me more "professional" and "elegant". 

Anyway, this is again a quick proposal, to be commented and criticized by everyone indeed. 

Kind regards,

Marieke

[Laurent Dualiac]

Thank you Marieke for your logo proposals. I like the graphics and the colours used. I am less convinced by the garland of children a little too much seen in my opinion and moreover excluded if I may say the adults who undergo forced circumcision or do not have all the elements to consent because they are not well informed. I therefore believe that the logo should not be limited to children alone, even if it is obvious that when the circumcision of children stops, that of adults should follow.

I propose to keep the graphic part which I find elegant and very professional and to think of something else to illustrate it. I thought of a tree with protruding roots, a rather massive trunk and a branch, all surrounded by a circle and using the colours proposed by Marieke.

The roots could evoke that we have our feet firmly on the ground and that we are not sweet dreamers, the trunk could evoke the strength of the union shown above by the ramifications that would symbolize the meeting and the coalition of our beautiful associations. The circle evokes the globe

and the international reality of our coalition

Best regards

Laurent

[Simon ten Kate]

I had a look at ww.designevo.com and selected this one. 

[Marieke Silvere]

Dear Simon, 

thank you very much for this logo proposal. I think it is quite nice, very dynamic with strong colors for the hands and the Earth around. I also like the green color you used for the text, since it is the color of hope, and I also like the font which is also modern and looks dynamic too. 

Kind regards,

Marieke

 

[Simon ten Kate]

Thank you.

Ideally we hire a graphic designer but this tool is a good alternative.

[Laurent Dualiac]

Hello, everybody,

The word mutilation is being weighed against other proposals for the name of our fine coalition.

First of all, I must explain to you that my intervention is also my brief testimony.
I was circumcised at the age of 4 for pseudo-medical reasons and I experienced it very badly. I started my "career" as an anti-circumcision activist at that time, at a very young age, while being unaware of the damage to my sexuality caused by this operation. I began to understand as a teenager the value of having a foreskin, at least for masturbation. However, I have led a very satisfying sex life throughout my life while putting aside this difference and in reality as a kind of denial.
 
I first heard the word mutilation about female sexual mutilation when reporting on the practice in Africa, and it was through this that the idea of campaigning with others seemed obvious to me. The violence against these women touched me very much and I also understood that the challenge for them to go through this tradition was the only way for them to have a social status that would integrate them into society. The report showed the pedagogy used to convince them to abandon this practice as well as the empathy for the operators. The damage caused by the intervention on sexuality and the lethal risks at the time of delivery were clearly described and explained.

It was when I joined Droit au Corps 4 years ago that I heard about mutilation in relation to male circumcision. The shock was difficult. But I had to admit that I was missing something very important for sexuality, that I had been taken away without my consent and with all the violence of inappropriate words as an explanation.  I was now drawing the parallel with excision and this strengthened my activist soul and my willingness to work for the abandonment of this mutilation.

I deeply believe that we must call by name the painful events that happen in our lives, whatever they may be. In my opinion, it would be detrimental to try to find an alternative that would water down the subject, because the risk would be to minimise its importance. We must therefore call a spade a spade. Circumcision is like excision a sexual mutilation since it removes most of the time entirely the sexual organ that the foreskin represents.
 In France we call the elderly « senior » and the blind for « those who dont see » etc. I don't think that this can help people affected by their age or by this handicap to overcome these difficulties. On the contrary, it seems to me that it amounts to a kind of denial or at least to an embarrassment to want to evoke with frankness and clarity a suffering.
I understand Brian's intention, which is to spare the sensitivity of the people affected by this operation, and I would like to thank him sincerely for this delicate attention.
However, I believe that we are not the psychologists at their patients' bedside to help them accept this difference.No doubt some people will need the help of psychologists to accept the difference and the definitive loss of part of the sexual organ. This work can be done by each one and according to his needs and it will certainly be profitable. We can also through our empathy and frankness help to accept this difficult reality, this is what is done at Droit au Corps.

For our part, we are all activists who are trying to find the best way to raise awareness about this drama that has been perpetuated for so long so that it can come to an end.

 The word mutilation certainly sounds harsh, but it has the advantage of striking people's minds and also that of being clear, precise and above all perceptible to all as the image of something horrible that must one day cease. It is in my opinion this articulation between the word and its meaning that is so important. 

[Simon ten Kate]

Thank you Laurent, I appreciate your perspective.

[ICASM Network]

copy-paste from today ICASM meeting

Laurent DaC 2020-05-08: [preference for the word "mutilation"] post here in the ICASM forum 

MW FSR 2020-05-10: Re DaC proposal 1 & 2, For now I wish to keep the term “Sexual Mutilation” in the statutes and the ICASM name. I am open to changing it later when a strong and compelling case is made why it should be changed, but for now it speaks to the truth, i.e. it speaks to the “guts” and the raw truth more than anything else. Why hide from the truth?! The purest truth gives us the clearest foundation, and the clearest target to aim for influence and to a certain extent will always be different.

JCL 2020-05-10: What Brian Earp says (especially in this recent video with Johan Nyman from Intakt Norden) is that talking about "mutilation" does not correspond to objective “truth”(scientific reality), but it’s only our own “truth”, with a pejorative value judgement: the circumcised person is automatically depreciated. He or she therefore suffers a double penalty: 1 - to have been circumcised 2 - to be depreciated. If we are in a spirit of compassion for the victims, Brian says we should not talk about "mutilation". Therefore, the most scientifically objective, factual term is simply "modification" to include all kinds of sexual “mutilation” (that’s not the case with Brian Earp’s proposal, “cutting”, for example Breast ironing). 

Talking about "mutilation" is the best way to cut off communication from the outset with those who practise circumcision on a large scale for cultural reasons, especially Muslims (our biggest challenge in the long term: see the opinion of Mohamed): it is probably condemning us to failure in our approach to these populations. This would probably be an obstacle of the same kind encountered by Western approaches in the fight against excision in recent decades, with even an increase in the willingness to excise in some countries, as in Guinea.

Victor Schiering 2020-05-10:  To the conceptual field between mutilation and modification

We want to choose the most inclusive term, i.e. the term with which somehow everyone is familiar, despite any possible confusion, despite possible teeth grinding.

It is important to note:

1) If we give up the term "mutilation", we weaken the WHO classifications of FGM. In other words, if we do so, we are building on the willingness of the FGM organisations to compromise. In this case we would need a term that is not too neutral.

2) If we maintain the term "mutilation" (from the point of view of the FGM NGO and the institution they set up), those who are professionally oriented (medical doctors), and those who bring their own personal resistance could keep their distance, or there is a danger that they will not jump up.

Compromise proposal: Term "intervention". Neutral, but also strong enough.

Experience:

In the campaign "My body - unharmed and self-determined" by TERRE DES FEMMES, MOGiS and Projekt 100% MENSCH (queer) we also agreed on "interventions" as a term for necessary short joint texts, with which everyone can somehow live without counteracting their principles or the political achievements.

This problem really only arises for short forms (titles, short joint declarations etc.). Differentiated explanations can and must find their place in everything that follows.

Of course, our discussion here also reveals the weakness of the WHO FGM classification. It also calls forms "mutilation" which do not meet the formal definition of mutilation (if it is not perceived as such, if it is not associated with any tissue loss) and mixes "mutilation" and "injury".

In other words, the WHO did not proceed here on a factual basis, but primarily according to moral and political criteria. What is not intended to diminish the moral aspects, they are immanently important. They are only weak, because they depend on cultural influence and to a certain extent will always be different.

Simon: FGM is really used by many organizations, we can’t change this. It would be seen as a regression, it’s a risk. By leaving the term mutilation we have the gap between FGM and MGM and that MG is not that bad as FGM.

Sophie: absolutely. OK with Simon. We must be at the same level of semantic

Marieke: ok Sophie

JCL: more and more use FGM/Cutting in the last years. We don’t need to repeat the same mistakes done in the field of the fight against FSM

Guy: ok JCL

David: agree JCL, “mutilation” is too confrontational. It shuts down the discussion.

Simon: it depends of the target, considering muslims is a real issue. Men will feel offended.

JCL: n the far future, the muslim worls is the most important community for circumcision we are challenged with. Then, it’s the main target of DaC’s strategy, if you look beyond the next 10 years, following the probable end of circumcision in Western countries including the US (depending of our job!). [Added post-meeting: it is utopian to believe that the UN will send blue helmets to Saudi Arabia for example, to enforce a "right to bodily integrity" that does not even exist in world international law, let's not forget that the main writer of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Frenchman René Cassin, was the president of the Alliance Israélite Universelle]. So it’s dangerous to use “mutilation” because confrontational. We need to establish a communication with Muslim populations, and that isn’t possible with the word “mutilation”.

Victor: “FGM” is used only in Western countries to raise money, not to fight on the ground of populations practicing “Cutting”. “Mutilation” is wrong. But they needed one term and took “mutilation”.

Michael: very complex issue, need more time to conclude. We need to watch the Earp-Video and make our home works about it. Subjective terms could be acceptable, but we need to be clear, simple and truthful, in a marketing point of view.

Marieke: proposes ablation / amputation

Simon: too

[Added post-meeting by JCL: some mutilations don’t use ablation / amputation, but modify the organ, even some cuttings]

About MOGiS proposal with “intervention” to place of “modification”

JCL/Guy 2020-05-10: "intervention" could be ephemeral, without modification of the organ, for example painting a sexual organ with a paint that lasts only 1 week: is this type of “intervention” really a problem? Or is it “chirurgical” intervention?

Simon: "intervention" it’s ambiguous

Michael: in English "intervention" could be many things. In which sens “intervention”?

Laurent: "intervention" is military-style and restricted to the medical.

David: I like the name “The Bodyguards”

Sophie: Like we want a bodyguard for every child in the world

[Added post-meeting by JCL: could be a basis for creative marketing campaings, such “Be the bodyguard of one children in the world, for only 10$...”].

[ICASM Network]

from today ICASM meeting

“(The) Bodyguards”

David Smith I love that name “(The) Bodyguards”, very very clever. It’s open the discussion because there is something a little curious to be questioned.

Guy: open to other perspectives, protection for children needing this protection

Victor: charming

Johan: very clever. The first time I heard something like this

Werner: a really good idea

Simon: plural singular ? extend the name ?

JCL: This opens up the possibility of creative marketing campaigns, such as offering everyone in the world the opportunity to become a bodyguard for a child's body, for only $10 a year!  (tee shirt, cap, badges...)

David Smith I like Bodyguard in the singular. Needs perhaps a strapline

Marieke: bodyguard not explanatory enough. It needs a subtext.

Simon ten Kate Join the Bodyguards, become a boyguard. It's a name people will remember

JCL: Sponsorship formulas of 1 child in the world can be proposed so that people feel personally involved. Concretely they could finance initiatives launched by ICASM.

Michael’s example: “Nike- Just Do It” - “Bodyguards. Just don’t cut it”

Marieke Silvere that's great

Sophie Dallière Blood-stained men are surprising too, but everyone gets it eventually. Bodyguards: we want a guard for every child.

It's a name that'll make people talk.

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

About the marketing possibilities of the name "The Bodyguards", Sophie points out this evangelical Christian NGO which is one of the most important in the USA: https://www.compassion.com/

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

I wonder if the coalition could use 2 names, the real statutory name "ICASM" which speaks unambiguously of "sexual mutilation" so that members can recognize each other, on why they are members, but use a "brand" externally, such as "(The) Bodyguards". Article 1 of the Statutes would explicitly state that "ICASM uses the '(The) Bodyguards' brand for its external communication". Perhaps this would help to resolve the current dilemmas.

[Michael Winnel]

I agree wholeheartedly with JCLs proposal, in essence because Sexual Mutilation speaks the most simply to the actual truth of what we are trying to address. It's more accurate and truthful to our goal than genital autonomy. 

JCLs proposal: "ICASM" which speaks unambiguously of "sexual mutilation" so that members can recognize each other, on why they are members, but use a "brand" externally, such as "(The) Bodyguards". 

[Michael Winnel]

There's another practical issue we have neglected here, and it favours the current name, and that is the acronym. 

Sexual Mutilation gives us the handy, useful, and easy to pronounce acronym: ICASM.

Genital Cutting doesn't = ICAGC 

Genital Mutilation doesn't = ICAGM 

So the current use of Sexual Mutilation has the additional advantage of producing the best acronym in ICASM. It seems that if we couple ICASM (internal name) with Bodyguards (external name) we have all bases covered. 

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

Deciding on the name of the coalition becomes urgent if we want to communicate publicly, especially on the Internet, for example if we want to publish the proceedings of the symposium at the end of May on the WWDOGA website, and even more so if we want to create a YouTube channel, a coalition website or any other presence on the Web.

If I understand Victor's last post correctly, we would have 3 options:

- ICASM = temporary initial title

- ICAGM = by replacing "sexual" with "genital".

- ICAGC = if in addition we want to replace "mutilation" by "cutting".

Note that the term "cutting" would pose a problem of definition for male genital mutilation that is less of a problem for female genital mutilation. And perhaps worse in the case of intersex.

For example, speaking of "cutting" for men:

- takes badly into account the case of circumcisions which still seem necessary in our time in the case of certain pathologies of the penis in adults

- poses a problem in relation to cultural circumcisions that are allowed (e.g. Intact Denmark's plan to allow the freedom to circumcise oneself from the age of 18)

- does not take into account certain cases of mutilation, such as forced foreskin retraction when it results in injury.

One could therefore not just talk about ICAGC since it would require more precision to be as precise as with the term "mutilation" (whose definition given in the ICASM statutes is very rich in meaning).

I therefore feel that there are only 2 options in what has been proposed by ICASM members so far with regard to the basic title (and not a possible branding such as "The Bodyguards"): ICASM or ICAGM.

Is it possible for ICASM member(s) to indicate their preference - after taking into account Victor's argumentation - so that a proposal can be quickly tabled in the Agora, if the current ICASM needs to be changed? As far as I'm concerned, I find Victor's argument for replacing "sexual" with "genital" quite convincing.

Le dimanche 19 avril 2020 à 23 h 01 min 38 s UTC-4, droita...@gmail.com a écrit :

Simon said:

This movement is about forced circumcision of boys, not opposing voluntary circumcision of men. I would like to use the child's perspective and using the assumption that children don't want to be circumcised, if they had a say they would say no. My motivation for intactivism is to speak on behalf of the children, boys in this case.
So I thought of "A Voice For Boys" Second line: Ending forced genital cutting of minors, or ending forced genital cutting. I know it's not inclusive but there are so many FGM groups already. They all use 'women', 'girls' in their names. If you make it gender neutral like Genital Autonomy it is too abstract for most people I'm afraid.

https://www.endfgm.eu/members/

I certainly like to include intersex too, but I am in favour of a name that people understand or can relate too. In the goals there can be mention of the right to genital integrity applies to all children, boys, girls and intersex

https://16days.thepixelproject.net/16-organisations-charities-and-grassroots-groups-working-to-stop-fgm/

A better tagline could be a positive one "defending his right to an intact body"

[dallieresophie]

Je n'arrive pas à retrouver les commentaires de Victor.

Ne serait-il pas plus simple d'utiliser : Modification Sexuelle ?

On garde ainsi l'acronyme ICASM et nous utilisons le plus rapidement possible "The Bodyguards" ?

Le terme est très large et les femmes comme les inters vont s'y retrouver.

Il est assez clair pour que l'on comprenne et ceux qui ne comprendront pas viendront chercher une explication.

Il représente une réalité et n'a pas de connotation péjorative.

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

Indeed, as Sophie said, one solution is to completely abandon a name such as ICASM or ICAGM and use only "Bodyguards" (or "The Bodyguards": English speakers will say what is best).

Note that the ICASM statutes do already speak of "modification" and not "mutilation":  "The ICASM's aim is to bring an end to any modification of a sexual organ carried out on an individual without their free and informed consent, and without medical necessity": there is therefore no need to modify anything other than Article 1 (Name).

I quite agree with this "Bodyguards" solution, which apparently solves all the problems. Are there enough members in favour of this solution (or prefer ICAGM, or ICASM) to make a proposal in the next Agora at the end of August? We should not delay more to decide a "definitive" name for the coalition.

Here is Victor's post (copied in the forum by Michael).  

[Simon ten Kate]

I like Sophie's proposal.

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

Here is the proposal in the Agora that will leave on August 28th, in which I have tried to synthesize the different points of view expressed in this thread. The proposed (external) name for the coalition would be "The Bodyguards". If this proposal does not suit you, see if you can formulate improvements.

[Robert Daoust]

In order to be consequent with the whole idea behind this proposition and reflect its meaning within the official Statutes, which will be seen and used by opponents as well as "for internal use", I  wonder if the following change would be appropriate. I suggest to modify the proposal by removing the first sentence:

International Coalition for the Abandonment of Sexual Mutilation" would be retained as a working description for internal use. 

and keep the second sentence:

In the Statutes, ARTICLE 1 - NAME would become:  

And modify the third sentence thus:

There shall be established between the adherents to the present statutes an international coalition for the abandonment of sexual modifications without consent, whose name shall be "The Bodyguards".

instead of

There shall be established between the adherents to the present statutes an international coalition for the abandonment of sexual mutilation with the following name "The Bodyguards".

[Robert Daoust]

I am thinking that there is an ambiguity with the expression "sexual modifications" in this era of sex change, trans people, etc. 

Also, some may deplore the loss of dramatization involved in sexual "modification" rather than "mutilation", although this latter expression may be offensive to millions of people who consider themselves improved rather than mutilated.

Therefore, I would suggest an amendment to my suggestion and speak of "sexual organs modifications". This is more precise and a bit more dramatic: 

• There shall be established between the adherents to the present statutes an international coalition for the abandonment of sexual organs modifications without consent, whose name shall be "The Bodyguards". 

My suggestions are made just in case they would improve the original proposal before it is submitted to the consent of the members. It is not that the original proposal does not suit me. The problem with sex organs cutting is that they become mutilated as a result, to various degrees. We understand that, but others do not. We may make a group of us against them, but I would prefer a group of us all against our common problems, and here a large part of the problem is informed consent. Perhaps several members are not ready to abandon the term "mutilation" at this moment, and we may go with that, but we would go faster, I believe, with a more comprehensive approach. 

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

Here's what I understand about the situation.

1 - Concerning Robert's proposal of Article 1 of the Statutes "There shall be established between the adherents to the present statutes an international coalition for the abandonment of sexual organs modifications without consent, whose name shall be "The Bodyguards". " It does not correspond to the exact mission of the coalition, as Article 2 of the statutes adds "and without medical necessity".

2 - Concerning the wording proposed in the Agora for article 1 of the statutes "There shall be established between the adherents to the present statutes an international coalition for the abandonment of sexual mutilation with the following name "The Bodyguards"", ICASM corresponds in this case to a rather useful internal use in relations between the members of the coalition or with actors who sympathise with the mission of the coalition, which makes it possible to know quickly and well what exactly we are talking about (article 2 of the statutes is very precise and exact but much longer). Externally, it is the brand "The Bodyguards" which will have the most notoriety and will be more known by the populations which practise traditional circumcision, in particular in the communications of the ICASM which will be intended for them. 

[Simon ten Kate]

 I like The Bodyguards because it refers to the body, if you circumcise you are harm the body of a child. Intactivism often uses genital, genitals, it's like treating the penis as a separate thing. (I struggle to express this well in English, hope I make myself clear). 

In many countries there is already  legislation that mention bodily integrity, in the Netherlands it's article 11, in the UK,  the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 "cts causing or tending to cause Danger to Life or Bodily Harm".  Circumcision harms the body, violates bodily integrity, not 'only' genital integrity, with the name the Bodyguards you relate to existing legislation. 

That's necessary because, I am generalising now,  (some) people see the penis as an appendage that varies in size; some have more others a bit less so they can say something like  "enough left after cutting a bit off" or think "my circumcised penis is stil bigger than his small intact dick" or sometimes say things like "why didn't they cut everything off". 

FGM campaigns are (more) successful also because people see it as an intrusion in the body of a girl, it's in her body that the cutting is going on whereas with Male Genital Mutilation it's outside the body, it's in the appendage, it's 'only' the penis.  This is not my opinion of course but how I think people percieve FGM and Male Genital Mutilation.

So using The Bodyguards makes people realise it's the a boy's body that you are harming.

[Simon ten Kate]

....you are harming the body of a child. (why can't you edit your entry ???)

[ICASM Network]

Hello Simon,

Following the recent decision that ICASM officially calls itself The Bodyguards, is it possible to modify the logo accordingly and send the file to the ICASM secretariat (icasm....@gmail.com). 

If 1 logo with subtitle is needed, for the time being it should be aligned with the subtitle used in the statutes (International Coalition for the Abandonment of Sexual Mutilation). But as this subtitle is not very consensual within TB, 1 logo without subtitle is indispensable.

Thanks!

[Simon ten Kate]

Some ideas 

[Simon ten Kate]

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

Here, the expression "genital surgery" is considered more neutral than "cutting", which is preferred by Brian Earp and is rather the trend of the last few years. Also noteworthy is the central proposal, which is the same as Brian Earp's, to open a public debate.

-------

Seven Things to Know about Female Genital Surgeries in Africa, The Public Policy Advisory Network on Female Genital Surgeries in Africa, 2012

Starting in the early 1980s, media coverage of customary African genital surgeries for females has been problematic and overly reliant on sources from within a global activist and advocacy movement opposed to the practice, variously described as female genital mutilation, female genital cutting, or female circumcision. Here, we use the more neutral expression female genital surgery. In their passion to end the practice, anti‐mutilation advocacy organizations often make claims about female genital surgeries in Africa that are inaccurate or overgeneralized or that don't apply to most cases. The aim of this article—which we offer as a public policy advisory statement from a group of concerned research scholars, physicians, and policy experts—is not to take a collective stance on the practice of genital surgeries for either females or males. Our main aim is to express our concern about the media coverage of female genital surgeries in Africa, to call for greater accuracy in cultural representations of little‐known others, and to strive for evenhandedness and high standards of reason and evidence in any future public policy debates. In effect, the statement is an invitation to actually have that debate, with all sides of the story fairly represented.  

[Michael Winnel]

Please resume creative brainstorming for the best possible name for the coalition

Dear All, It has come to the coalitions attention that we need to determine if the name "The Bodyguards" will be acceptable to government, regulatory departments and officials. As a result of this concern, a discussion around finding the best possible name has re-emerged. 

Our coalitions name must satisfy the following criteria, (hence it being so challenging):

• Palatable to Governments i.e. seen as credible by org's such as the UN, EU, AAP etc. 
• Palatable to the public
  • preferably memorable and clear
  • preferably obvious in terms of what it is and its mission - however this may be earned over time, such as in the case of GreenPeace and Amnesty International, which have enormous brand recognition today, but are only partially clear, or even unclear, in terms of their literal names.  
• Does not overly restrict us
  • "The Bodyguards" vagueness keeps it open to expanding into other areas in the future, such as abandoning corporal punishment. 
  • ICGA (International Coalition for Genital Autonomy), despite having many strengths, has the weakness of being restrictive to just GA, and not other sexual mutilations such as breast ironing, nor allowing future scope should the coalition wish to broaden its mission.

To this end, & to stimulate creativity, I am providing a list of all the generic words used in naming Organisations and their Federations:

Types of Organisations:

• Institute - an organization having a particular purpose, especially one that is involved with science, education, or a specific profession.
• Academy - a place of study or training in a special field, e.g. "a police academy"; a society or institution of distinguished scholars and artists or scientists that aims to promote and maintain standards in its particular field.
• Foundation - an institution established with an endowment, for example a research body or charity. e.g. "charitable foundations"
• Centre
• Agency
• Administration

Types of Unions/Federations:

• Federation - a group of states with a central government but independence in internal affairs.
• Coalition - a temporary alliance for combined action, especially of political parties forming a government, e.g. "a coalition between Liberals and Conservatives"
• Consortium - an association, typically of several companies.
• Syndicate - a group of individuals or organizations combined to promote a common interest.
• Alliance - a union or association formed for mutual benefit, especially between org's/nations.
• Association - a group of people organized for a joint purpose.
• Movement - a group of people working together to advance their shared political, social, or artistic ideas, e.g. "the labour movement"
• Society - an organization or club formed for a particular purpose or activity, e.g. "the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds"
• League - a collection of people, countries, or groups that combine for mutual protection or cooperation, e.g. "the League of Nations"
• Union - the action of joining together or the fact of being joined together, especially in a political context; a society or association formed by people with a common interest or purpose.
• Cooperative - (of a farm, business, etc.) owned and run jointly by its members, with profits or benefits shared among them.
• Entente - a friendly understanding or informal alliance between states or factions, e.g.
• "the emperor hoped to bring about an entente with Russia"
• Network - a group or system of interconnected people or things.

Jason Metters suggested  dispensing with terms like "Institute" and "Coalition" altogether, and creatively brainstorming the more amorphous (partially-vague) brand driven names like Amnesty International, The Bodyguards, GreenPeace, with his idea of "Autonomy International". 

A related example, is our member "TABU International" whose name references tackling the taboo necessary to abandon harmful traditions. From their website:

The association TABU INTERNATIONAL is committed to child protection against ritualised violence of genital mutilation ("circumcision"). It promotes education in Kenya and the construction of missing educational facilities such as kindergartens and schools.

The aim of the association TABU INTERNATIONAL is the total abolition of genital mutilation as a harmful tradition and form of massive ritual violence against underage persons under protection!

We break a taboo to protect children from ritual violence! Children's rights are human rights!

Please resume creative brainstorming for the best possible name for the coalition.  

Warm Regards,

Michael 

TB Facilitator

FSR Australasia 

[Michael Winnel]

A few additional points:

• We could create a new name, or keep "The Bodyguards" name, and add a motto (serving the purpose of giving context and meaning to the organisations name)
  • e.g. "The sun never sets on our cause or our people"
    
  • e.g. "No one's body is safe until everyone's body is safe"
• ICASM is a coalition of organisations, not individuals (with the exception of a few highly coveted experts). In essence we are a federation of professional, inclusive, collaborative organisations. A vessel of org's. Keep this in mind when brainstorming. 

[jean-christophe Lurenbaum]

To make such a choice, that is, to give up the name The Bodyguards or to keep it, I think we have to put ourselves in the target of the vision we have for our coalition. In my opinion, such a coalition project is only worthwhile if we have a very strong ambition, which is "the abandonment of sexual mutilation throughout the world". So we should not choose the name according to what the coalition is today (still small and little known), but according to what we want it to become in 5 years time (that it brings together most of the organisations fighting against female, intersex and male sexual mutilation). Don't be shy!

Today, The Bodyguards does indeed have a "fun" side, not very serious when it comes to dialogue with institutions (UN, UN-CRC, UNICEF, WHO, country governments). But if the coalition brings together the most important organisations in the world and takes high-level initiatives, then the name The Bodyguards could correspond very well to the image we wish to give, i.e. very "determined" "protectors" of all "bodies" (everybody will understand "children" at first even if we don't have to be explicit), but "defenders/guards" and not "aggressors". The image of the powerful and armed bodyguard of the movie with Kevin Costner (we are using his sympathetic image for us) corresponds well, I believe, to the image we wish to give as a target. On that day, until 5 years, everyone will find the name The Bodyguards quite normal and very serious.

So, it seems to me that we can make this bet, that the coalition will deserve its name within 5 years! On the other hand, I think it's a good idea suggested byTim to add a Motto to the name, so that it will be easier to understand us until 5 years time. In the logic of The Body"guards", I tend to prefer his 1st proposition "No one's body is safe until everyone's body is safe".

Having said that, I think it's quite difficult to change the name once it's gone (website etc), on the other hand I think it's quite easy to evolve the Motto over time if it's desirable.

In conclusion, I think that we could, at the next Agora on 28th February, propose to the coalition to adopt the Motto "No one's body is safe until everyone's body is safe", in order to quickly clarify the meaning of The Bodyguards, but to be open to change the Motto if someone makes a better proposal than Tim's.

[circharmsurvey]

Pardon me for coming into this discussion rather late. I'm trying to catch up on my reading about the issues and controversies that occurred before my invitation to this international collaboration.

I'd like to comment on the discussion over the term 'mutilation', which seems to be ongoing. This term is, of course, very subjective, as others before me have stated. 'Mutilation', like the word 'beauty', is in the eye of the beholder. Certainly many women and men who were subjected to circ do not consider themselves to be mutilated. Many consider it an enhancement.

However, if ICASM exists to be an international voice for those of us who were subjected to involuntary circ, and we consider ourselves to be mutilated, then ICASM should retain the word mutilation.

IMPORTANT QUESTION: Does ICASM wish to portray itself as a voice of the affected?

If we, as members, see ourselves as mutilated, then it's our right to define ourselves in that way and we have an obligation to inform the world about it. I think this gives us added credibility on the issue. If we are perceived as anything other than the 'voice of the affected' I think we run the risk of being perceived as "a bunch of white Western, culturally insensitive, uncircumcised do-gooders".

[If ICASM is a 'voice for the affected', please see my 'Afterthought' below for a new proposed motto.]

BTW, the politicization of the anti-FGM movement began when Fran Hosken - a white uncircumcised American woman - published The Hosken Report and campaigned in the 1980s to change the term 'female circumcision' to 'female genital mutilation'. Although the new term eventually became widely adopted in international circles, it is being slowly replaced with more neutral terms that are more culturally sensitive. The problem with 'mutilation' with regard to FGM is that, in its lesser forms (pricking, nicking), there is no actual or significant tissue loss, no change in form or function, and I'm unaware of any known long-term sexual/reproductive harm. But (IMHO) continued use of the term mutilation by anti-FGM groups is an issue for the anti-FGM movement to deal with.

For us fighting MGM, however, there is no doubt that removal of 1/3 to 1/2 of the most erogenous skin system of the penis changes both form(appearance) and function, and when imposed on an unconsenting child, it causes immediate and long-term adverse physical, sexual, emotional and psychological harm for an as-yet-undefined percentage of males. Therefore it can rightly be called a mutilation.

Another reason to retain the word 'mutilation' is the fact that it keeps us in alignment with the anti-FGM and anti-IGM movements. If we choose any word other than 'mutilation' [like the non-judgmental terms 'cutting', 'modification', 'alteration' or 'intervention'] we risk defining ourselves, and the male issue, as something separate from the two movements with whom (I believe) we wish to build bridges and form alliances.

I totally understand and agree with Brian Earp about using other non-judgmental terms, but he is approaching this from an academic perspective and does not want to be perceived as being culturally insensitive. Using these terms is a good tactic for people like Brian, and for institutions like the U.N., WHO, AAP, EU, Amnesty Intl, Human Rights Watch, etc. when they talk about the problem. These non-inflammatory terms are also perhaps wise to use when designing outreach programs to specific affected communities (USA, Muslims, Jews, African tribes, Filipinos, S. Koreans, etc).

But for the purpose of this collaborative group - if indeed ICASM is composed mostly of circumcision sufferers, joined by our intact allies - then I believe we have a right to take ownership of the term 'mutilation'. This does not prevent ICASM - if and when it begins to issue official papers, reports and policy statements - from discussing the issue (when/where appropriate) in a more neutral manner with terms like 'genital cutting', 'modification or alteration of sexual organs', or 'medically unnecessary bodily interventions'.

I hope my thoughts are of some constructive value to this collaboration.

Tim

[AFTERTHOUGHT: If ICASM wishes to portray itself as "A Voice for the Affected" - thank you MOGiS! - then I suggest to use this as a possible motto for ICASM. I also see no reason why it cannot be combined with the earlier proposed motto about bodies, thus:

"A Voice for the Affected. Because NO BODY is safe until ALL BODIES are safe." 

The common English spelling of 'nobody' is one word, but making it two words emphasizes that we speak of physical bodies. To capitalize the words NO BODY and ALL BODIES shows that we intentionally misspell the word 'nobody' for added emphasis. A graphic artist can still make the "O" in BODY to be a female symbol and the "O" in 'BODIES' to be a 'combo' symbol to represent male/female/intersex/trans. This use of graphics (I hope) sends the message that female bodies are not the only bodies to be protected, and perhaps it also makes an appeal to feminist organizations that by working with anti-MGM and anti-IGM groups they are, in fact, making the protection of women's bodies more secure.]

[Marieke Silvere]

Dear all, 

I like the argumentation of Tim in favor of using the term "mutilation" and I personnaly agree with it. Since we want a second term to define more precisely what The Bodyguards is (at least in the first years and then hopefully people will know what The Bodyguards is and we could remove the second part progressively from our communication material), I am thinking we could simply use :

"The Bodyguards : International Coalition for the Abandonment of Sexual Mutilation".

This way, we would have a name that people will remember (TB) and a more institutional name (ICASM) which describes what we are and what is our goal (with the term "Abandonment" being acceptable I think for relationship with institutions). We would indeed need the help of a graphical artist to make it into an attractive and evocative logo, which could include the female, male and intersex/trans symbols indeed. 

I like also Tim's proposal "Because NO BODY is safe until ALL BODIES are safe", but I personnaly think it is not explicative enough to be used by itself after The Bodyguards. Maybe we could indeed use this sentence, with the "o" to be modified into female, male and intersex/trans symbols as already suggested, on webpages, flyers and other communication materials. For me, it seems actually more a description of our vision / goal than a description of what is The Bodyguards. I like less "A Voice for the Affected" since it made me think about "A Voice for Men" and also because it is less precise than talking about "sexual mutilation". And, as mentioned by Tim, only victims (or allies of victims) would use the term "sexual mutilation" in this context so it is quite clear with only the full name of ICASM as complement to The Bodyguards I think. 

Kind regards,

Marieke

[circharmsurvey]

Thanks for this feedback Marieke.

Since we are faced with two names (ICASM and The Bodyguards) perhaps one possible solution is to have two names and two mottos... which I envision in terms of using both of them on letterhead or a web page.

The Bodyguards

Because NO BODY is safe until ALL BODIES are safe         [using the graphic symbols where the letter "O" appears]

.

.

.

.

.

A project of the International Collaboration for the Abandonment of Sexual Mutilation: A Voice for the Affected